Difference between revisions of "Talk:Mirrors"

From ArchWiki
Jump to: navigation, search
(use new package templates, see Help:Style)
(Moved sourceforge unofficial mirror: re)
 
(11 intermediate revisions by 5 users not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
== <s>archlinux.fr down?</s> ==
+
== rsync errors in tier2 mirrors ==
  
Can't reach the main site or any of its subdomains. :/
+
It is possible for arch mirrors to be in an inconsistent state if rsync fails at some point. This is due to mirrors not generating their own package databases but rather copying the one from lower tier mirrors. In these cases, trying to grab a package from these mirrors may result in a 404 error due to incomplete syncing. The method described in [https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:NewMirrors#2-tier_mirroring_scheme Tier 2 requirements] does not adequately protect this case.
--[[User:Zatricky|Zatricky]] 11:55, 23 December 2008 (EST)
+
  
nvm. up again --[[User:Zatricky|Zatricky]] 05:16, 24 December 2008 (EST)
+
The following code will re-run rsync if it ever fails to ensure mirrors are properly synced.
  
== <s>Official mirrors</s> ==
+
{{bc|<nowiki>
 +
RET=1
 +
COUNTER=100
 +
until [[ RET -eq 0 && COUNTER -gt 0 ]]; do
 +
rsync -rtlH --safe-links --delete-after --progress -h --timeout=600 --contimeout=60 -p \
 +
            --delay-updates --no-motd --bwlimit=4096 \
 +
            --temp-dir="/tmp" \
 +
            --exclude='*.links.tar.gz*' \
 +
            --exclude='/other' \
 +
            --exclude='/sources' \
 +
            --exclude='/iso' \
 +
      'rsync://mirror.pkgbuild.com/packages/' \
 +
      "/srv/repo" &&
 +
      RET=0
 +
      COUNTER=$[COUNTER-1]
 +
done;
 +
</nowiki>}}
  
Is there any benefit to listing official mirrors on this page? The links are not helpful due to the $repo variable, and the ''official'' list is regularly updated. Rather, I suggest we direct users to install the latest version of {{Pkg|pacman-mirrorlist}} and edit {{ic|/etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist}}.
+
== Moved sourceforge unofficial mirror ==
  
-- [[User:Pointone|pointone]] 17:41, 26 March 2010 (EDT)
+
I've moved the old sourceforge page from the heading "Global" to "Sourceforge (old ISOs)" and to the bottom of the page. The heading "Global" at the top of the unofficial mirrors list doesn't seem necessary since there's no "global" mirrors under the heading anyway. Even though the sourceforge entry seems quite useless I've moved it to the bottom of the list just in case someone else decides they need ~10 year old ISOs. {{Unsigned|8 December 2015‎|MisterAnderson}}
  
: If we want people to find the mirrorlist through the wiki, we may as well refer to http://repos.archlinux.org/wsvn/packages/pacman-mirrorlist/repos/core-i686/mirrorlist in the article...
+
:Well done, I'm not even sure if we need to list it at all actually, what could be the purpose of using a 10+yo iso for a rolling-release distro? — [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 07:02, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
: -- [[User:ZZyXx|zZyXx]] 14:56, 3 April 2010 (EDT)
+
  
: I would say there is a definate _non_ benefit to listing - that is, someone has to maintain this separately.  As seen from http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/18151 - which is where the estonian mirror was removed - there is a process for taking care of the mirror in the pacman process, but not here.  I removed the estonian mirror (which _was_ my primary) after it was removed; they no longer are mirroring so errors occur.  I checked why, and found the bug report, and also that we list _here_ that it's still up. _I don't want to do this regularly_ [[User:Lastebil|Lastebil]] 03:31, 4 May 2010 (EDT)
+
::Who knows, but if it gets deleted, someone will show up needing it for some strange reason. Wouldn't suprise me, anyway. [[User:MisterAnderson|MisterAnderson]] ([[User talk:MisterAnderson|talk]]) 19:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
  
: Mirrors have been removed. -- [[User:Pointone|pointone]] 00:18, 5 May 2010 (EDT)
+
:::The stats on the SF page are quite worrisome indeed... Let's see what effect your edit has on the number of downloads there: if it drops noticeably, it means that people were really being sent there from this page thinking to download an up-to-date image, hence the link should be deleted; if the number of downloads doesn't drop, maybe there really are people looking for old iso's... — [[User:Kynikos|Kynikos]] ([[User talk:Kynikos|talk]]) 14:44, 11 December 2015 (UTC)

Latest revision as of 14:48, 11 December 2015

rsync errors in tier2 mirrors

It is possible for arch mirrors to be in an inconsistent state if rsync fails at some point. This is due to mirrors not generating their own package databases but rather copying the one from lower tier mirrors. In these cases, trying to grab a package from these mirrors may result in a 404 error due to incomplete syncing. The method described in Tier 2 requirements does not adequately protect this case.

The following code will re-run rsync if it ever fails to ensure mirrors are properly synced.

RET=1
COUNTER=100
until [[ RET -eq 0 && COUNTER -gt 0 ]]; do
 rsync -rtlH --safe-links --delete-after --progress -h --timeout=600 --contimeout=60 -p \
             --delay-updates --no-motd --bwlimit=4096 \
             --temp-dir="/tmp" \
             --exclude='*.links.tar.gz*' \
             --exclude='/other' \
             --exclude='/sources' \
             --exclude='/iso' \
       'rsync://mirror.pkgbuild.com/packages/' \
       "/srv/repo" &&
       RET=0
       COUNTER=$[COUNTER-1]
done;

Moved sourceforge unofficial mirror

I've moved the old sourceforge page from the heading "Global" to "Sourceforge (old ISOs)" and to the bottom of the page. The heading "Global" at the top of the unofficial mirrors list doesn't seem necessary since there's no "global" mirrors under the heading anyway. Even though the sourceforge entry seems quite useless I've moved it to the bottom of the list just in case someone else decides they need ~10 year old ISOs. —This unsigned comment is by MisterAnderson (talk) 8 December 2015‎. Please sign your posts with ~~~~!

Well done, I'm not even sure if we need to list it at all actually, what could be the purpose of using a 10+yo iso for a rolling-release distro? — Kynikos (talk) 07:02, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
Who knows, but if it gets deleted, someone will show up needing it for some strange reason. Wouldn't suprise me, anyway. MisterAnderson (talk) 19:03, 9 December 2015 (UTC)
The stats on the SF page are quite worrisome indeed... Let's see what effect your edit has on the number of downloads there: if it drops noticeably, it means that people were really being sent there from this page thinking to download an up-to-date image, hence the link should be deleted; if the number of downloads doesn't drop, maybe there really are people looking for old iso's... — Kynikos (talk) 14:44, 11 December 2015 (UTC)